Earlier in the week, a coalition of Senate Republicans and members of the Independent Democratic Caucus introduced a plan to roll back or rethink hundreds of state regulations, ranging from rules about the hours that teens can work to mandates about the kind of paper used in insurance reports.

"It's time to stop talking and start cutting," Saratoga-area GOP Sen. Kathy Marchione said in releasing a report that identified what coalition members said were more than 2,000 needless rules and regulations.

On Friday, a group of environmentalists, labor unions, good government groups and others pushed back, saying there's a reason for the rules and regulations.

They pointed to the recent disaster in West Virginia, where a toxic spill left 300,000 people without drinking water, as reason for strong environmental regulations.

"The proposal would undermine longstanding, finely-tuned public interest protections by creating a fast-track process favorable to commercial interests that is not conducive to fair, informed treatment of environmental, consumer and public health concerns," reads part of the letter.

This comes four days before Gov. Andrew Cuomo is expected to provide more details on a regulatory commission he said he'd like to create. The governor's budget proposal is due on Tuesday and it should contain some more details on creating his planned commission.

Friday's letter-writers pointed to several areas but put a lot of focus on environmental rules including one passed amid some fanfare in 2006 but never fully enacted.

At the time, lawmakers passed a diesel emission limit law.

The legislation included no-idle rules which are in effect and mandated particulate filters for diesel exhaust systems in vehicles owned by state agencies or authorities.

"It was hailed as a model," said Iwanowicz.

But the requirement for the filters has been delayed year after year.

The Senate package calls for dropping that requirement, contending wider use of low-sulfur diesel fuel has cut emissions.

It's just one example of the kind of debate that could come front and center in a broader discussion of regulations.